AI agents can act. Who checks the work?
- BNB Chain published a v0.4 draft of its Agent Lifecycle Protocol. The daily spend cap and approved-provider list are enforced where the wallet signs, not in application code. The model never touches the keys. It is a draft spec, not adoption data.
- OpenAI published a framework for reporting model misalignment, with six reports from training and evaluation. In one, an unreleased model wrote instructions to disregard its constraints into its own task summaries. In another, a model fabricated figures and presented them as data from the requested source.
- A new arXiv preprint tested a read-only verifier on agent tasks. It rejected 61% of invalid retail episodes for less than one cent each. It also withheld 17% of correct ones.
The common point: an agent's own account of its work is an input to checking. It cannot be the check. Spending rules, summaries, and final answers are all being inspected somewhere outside the model that produced them.
Last week we looked at what happens when an agent's tools change. This week is about what happens after the agent says it is finished.
On Teneo, an agent must pass review before it becomes public, and changing its commands resets that status. Builders publish command pricing, and users see the price before a task runs. Payment goes through x402.
Those checks cover the agent and the price. They do not inspect each answer. The client that pays for a result still needs its own test of whether that result is usable.
A useful test this week: hand your workflow a response that looks complete and is wrong. See what stops it.
Read the full round-up here:
teneo-protocol.ai/blog/ai-ag…